I don't see how she could have done any better. Her delivery — the passion, inflection, energy, clarity — is as close to perfect as I can imagine from someone who's found her way into the position to run for the presidency.
I'm not saying I agree substantively. I'm talking about the sheer achievement in speech giving. And you may remember that my instant reaction to Trump's SOTU was, "That was damn near perfect. So upbeat, full of optimism."
I appreciate a great speech. And Elizabeth Warren just delivered the hell out of one. If you're not willing to concede that, then I think you can't distinguish form from substance.
Much of what she said was about the troubles of the middle class, and it sounded a lot like Trump. There were many times when I said out loud, "This is like Trump." And she got a crowd reaction that reminded me of Trump's. People cheered and chants got going.
Unlike so many candidates, she sounds as though she's really feeling what she is saying. In the very beginning there was a sobbing quality to her voice, but as she warmed up, it became excellent passion and energy. It was so different from Hillary, who could sound robotic or like some acting coach had taught her how to give the impression of human feeling. Warren seems to have a strong natural talent for speaking to a crowd, really coming alive in front of a crowd.
I'm thoroughly impressed.
९ फेब्रुवारी, २०१९
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
२५७ टिप्पण्या:
257 पैकी 1 – 200 नवीन› नवीनतम»Did she pause to sip a beer?
Good luck Althouse. Best wishes as you continue your ophthalmic surgery.
Warren communicates empathy where Hillary communicates none. I always thought she was the strongest of the candidates who fancy themselves socialists. Too bad the Left hates fake Indians almost as much as the Right.
The best way to help out the middle and working classes... eliminate their jobs and destroy the industries that employ them.
"Best wishes as you continue your ophthalmic surgery."
Thanks, you jerk.
Most of the time I was not looking, but listening. I can pay attention better when I'm not looking.
I think a problem EW has is that she can sound so emotional she seems crazy. But she didn't do that today.
So Ms. Warren has a really good acting coach that preps her for her speeches. Too bad she does not have a trusted advisor who will keep her from lying about her being a native American and using that lie to further her career.
So that makes what, 40 or 50 Democrats running? Should be an interesting campaign season.
Her big problem when speaking is she’s not funny. Humorless.
Trump is very funny. Obama and W had decent humor. McCain, too.
Warren is earnest like Romney.
Good on her. I'm wary of wishing for a particular opponent because they are perceived as weak, but if Republicans can't wish for Liz in the race, who can they?
Despite the note written on her palm: 'DON'T REPEAT MARTHA COAKLEY'S MISTAKES', Liz is a Martha Coakley.
".....I appreciate a great speech. And Elizabeth Warren just delivered the hell out of one...." LOL - AA that's because you're a former "Academic" who's easily persuaded by propoganda. Most people will say just about anything to get what they want, so it is more important to judge people by what they do and not what they say. Anyone can talk a big game, but the truly great let their actions speak for them.
OK. What did she say? I never watch speeches.
Why does she want to be president?
What would she do better than Trump?
From what you've said so far, I'm doubtful. The middle class looks to me to be doing great with Trump as Prez.
I'll take the fake Indian diversity hire over the real corrupt un-indicted criminal.
Although - both want to screw us over.
Unfortunately for Warren, Harris is the chosen one.
She starts off unlistenable. skipping in... skipping in more... the women of Lawrence are here to say enough is enougn... our children's lives and our grandchildren's lives ... a rigged system that props up the rich and kicks dirt on everyone else ... undo the terrible acts of this administration ... bid for structural change ...
I guess we agreed the content is shit. The cadence is wrong. line applause line applause line applause
Not a single insight.
Would that be Ms. Hillary?
"This is like Trump." Good Lord, Ann, where have you been?
Trump is like Warren, or more accurately Bernie. Where were you in 2015-2016 when EVERYONE was saying they are talking about the same thing???
Progressives pointing out the loss of the middle class? Wha--? how different! How new!
/sarcasm
Her book on the two income trap reached well to the left and right, darn shame she lied about being native american on legal documents. (Bar Registration, because we all know if someone who didn't have her elite status would be disbarred in a heartbeat.)
"you can't distinguish form from substance."
well lets see;
"she's really feeling what she is saying"
"it became excellent passion and energy."
C'mon Ann that's all style over substance.
You didn't mention one policy of her platform.
You 60s liberals (Kennedy charisma)don't get it. We voted for Trump's policies , not his style!
"LOL - AA that's because you're a former "Academic" who's easily persuaded by propoganda."
If you were my student, I would tweak you for being a bad reader. (I never said I found the argument persuasive.)
And if I were Amy Klobuchar, I'd throw a binder at you for the way you spelled propaganda.
I didn't like Trump's speech either. Except he used the dem woman as props, that was good.
"C'mon Ann that's all style over substance. You didn't mention one policy of her platform."
That was my obvious intent.
I'm speaking about form only.
If I had a transcript, I'd do something with the substance. But I'm not interested in talking about the substance doing my own transcriptions.
It's exactly what I did with Trump right after the SOTU.
"If you're not willing to concede that, then I think you can't distinguish form from substance."
Are you trolling again Professor?
That such a lefty lib thing to say. Preemptively shut the door on opposing viewpoints. Climate change deniers don't count. The deplorables don't get a say. Anyone who thinks otherwise is guilty of Thoughtcrime.
And what the hell does this mean?
"...from someone who's found her way into the position to run for the presidency"
Is this one of those passive-evasive-aggressive whateverisms like "mistakes were made"?
Found her way into? Actively did something to get there or accidentally/serendipitously appeared there by magic?
She's been trying to force her way into this position for years (with a lot of help from the left wing media (BIRM)).
Warren Announces Candidacy
Gentlemen, start your Injuns!
Yancey Ward said...Unfortunately for Warren, Harris is the chosen one.
Chosen only by the Obama/Jarrett wing of the party. I don't think that faction has full control.
she also lied about the substance, of it, her big debut in 2012, when she buoyed the Obama campaign in 2012, now she's two cycles past her expiration date, with understudies like cortez stealing her thunder,
"You 60s liberals (Kennedy charisma)don't get it. We voted for Trump's policies , not his style!"
Some people voted for Trump because he was the last Republican standing and they care about illegal immigration.
But Trump's base loves his style.
I'm one of the few people who don't like much of Trump's substance but enjoy a great deal of his style.
Lizzie is a good speaker. She takes her 40 whacks at 120 years ago’s issues of the oppresssed workers. Trouble is the workers are mostly overseas now, and Only Trump arranged to get those jobs to come back here. Trump has tarrifed and Corporate Tax rate lowered to Win the battles that she once fought and lost. And her being an educated Scots-Irish fighter is appealing , but she still has to fight today’s wars.
I thought the part about having to toilet train her daughter over the weekend (to get her into the only childcare she could fine) was well done. A very relatable situation.
The "middle class" trope is a tired old cliche, and sadly, it will never go away. Both sides use and abuse it in the belief that 90% of Americans fancy themselves to be middle class. As someone firmly in the middle of the middle class, I can't imagine how Warren gets away with presenting her ideas as something that will benefit me. Wealth distribution, socialized medicine, environmental fascism, all will cost me and never benefit me.
America's problem is that Warren doesn't mean a thing she says in support of the middle class, but she credibly delivers a message we want to hear and the credulous will buy it.
BTW, do we know how the woman paid for law school? There was money available at the time for native Americans to use for law school.
I honestly don't see how Warren can survive the latest "reveal" concerning her fraudulent claim of Native American ethnicity in order to advance her career. The media will do its best to cover for her, but her fraud goes to the heart of the affirmative action project, and it would be an unnecessary bitter pill for the left to swallow. If she were the best option to run against Trump, then maybe. But there's no evidence that she's got any better chance than 3 or 4 others who are already in the race (and quite a bit of evidence that her chances are worse).
"C'mon Ann that's all style over substance. You didn't mention one policy of her platform."
Substance? To win the Democratic nomination, substance is the thing you need to avoid. The platform is:
-I'm not a white man
-Government good
-Orange Man Bad
-Border bad
Wealth redistribution, that is.
"the part about having to toilet train her daughter over the weekend"
Did she actually manage to toilet train a child in a weekend? I would find that difficult to believe.
Just queuing it up now to watch. I object to "Red" Kennedy's intro with all its anti-Trump dry emotion. Guys like him are a big part of Warren's baggage and perhaps a reason why she will ultimately fail: her message simply cannot be "not Trump." People won't buy that, but maybe you will.
"The media will do its best to cover for her"
No, they won't. WaPo was the publisher of the article this week. They would only provide cover if she were running against a Republican, but not other Democrats like Harris.
Did she actually manage to toilet train a child in a weekend? I would find that difficult to believe.
Yeah, that's not gonna happen.
The difficulty of finding adequate childcare thing seems unbelievable for a woman living in Cambridge making the kind of money she makes, too.
"Did she actually manage to toilet train a child in a weekend? I would find that difficult to believe."
Elizabeth Warren tell a lie?
People won't buy that, but maybe you will.
Warren simply cannot be a uniter of the present electorate if her message is to reject Trump and Trump supporters.
I noticed her applauding much of Trump's SOTU speech while the ladies in white remained silent. Why doesn't she highlight where she agrees with Trump instead of just trashing him?
OK, now the warm up is over....
Oh, Althouse; I am just like you. I love a good speech. I love the craftsmanship involved in speechwriting. I am only a little less interested in the delivery.
I watched the Joe Kennedy III introduction of Warren. It was superb speech craftsmanship. Much better than Ed “Mayor Quincy” Markey. Between the Kennedy family and Warren (who may have gotten hers from the Kennedys), there are some world class speechwriters.
I always said that Obama’s team of speechwriters including Jon Favreau was the best in a generation. One of the things your commenters hate me for.
And I have said that Donald Trump is almost listenable, when he is given a good speech to deliver by a team of competent Republican speechwriters. As opposed to the usual Trump pile of word-vomit.
But I did not watch Warren’s speech. I was off to watch Wisconsin at Michigan. And there is just no way I am ever going to be able to comfortably listen to that lying hag Warrren. Her voice (regardless of the quality of the speechwriting) is fingernails-on-chalkboard for me. She sounds like the nightmare ex-wife. And while there are serious Democrats with whom I deeply disagree (Durbin, Holder, Schiff, Nadler, Schumer, etc.), Warren isn’t one of them. She has no serious record of achievement at anything; she has no serious platform now.
I am sorry that you so profoundly mistook my comment as some sort of insult (?!) at you. It was nothing of the sort. (And not the first time you completely mistook a comment of mine as an insult.). No; my comment was aimed at how your commenters will react to any post that is less than openly hostile to any liberal Democrat.
I know damned well how they would respond to me if I ever wrote favorably about Senator Pocahontas.
"People cheered and chants got going."
Uhhhh... the supporters of the fake Native American responded with chants?
That wording sends crossed smoke signals.
I am Laslo.
Althouse: "Some people voted for Trump because he was the last Republican standing and they care about illegal immigration."
Lets reformulate that to better reflect reality.
Trump was viewed by the republican electorate as being the best chance to slow the illegal immigration onslaught, fight to remove the stupid one-sided trade deals that were designed to shut America down by transferring jobs and wealth overseas, and to fight back against the dems in the culture war that the LLR's had long ago given up on and surrendered.
Elizabeth Warren just delivered the hell out of one. If you're not willing to concede that, then . . .
No, let's all concede that (for the sake of the argument -- not going to waste time watching her.
BFD
I thought the part about having to toilet train her daughter over the weekend (to get her into the only childcare she could fine) was well done. A very relatable situation.
Introduce yourself to the country with toilet training! Federal program required for single moms.
Didn't she have a poopoose?
I'm thoroughly duped. FIFY.
"Trump was viewed by the republican electorate as being the best chance to slow the illegal immigration onslaught he contributed to mightily."
FIFY
LLR Chuck: "And while there are serious Democrats with whom I deeply disagree (Durbin, Holder, Schiff, Nadler, Schumer, etc....."
LOL
"serious Democrats"
Good old Chuck. Always trying to sneak another little pickmeup to his dem pals into the conversation.
"professional" hack Harwood
"masterful" hack O'Donnell
"brilliant" hack Maddow
"competent" hack Durbin
"magnificent" hack obama
Simple one-time "mis-speaker" of his time "in-country" Blumenthal
Jeez, could you at least attempt to make it less obvious?
Too funny.
Ann you stating that you are against Trump's policies is no revelation , we all know you are a liberal and a cultural marxist.That's the reason why you voted for Stein.
Logical people vote for a candidate's policies not his style.
You true feelings about Trump voters is very telling.You just called the majority of them deploreables because they voted for him because of his style. An you liberals are sooooooo smart (validictorian and first in law school)because you vote on policies.
Yea right!
HT: ""Trump was viewed by the republican electorate as being the best chance to slow the illegal immigration onslaught he contributed to mightily."
Yeah, this problem and onslaught that has gone on for 40 years is something Trump contributed to "mightily".
Uh huh.
Nice try.
Nowhere near up to LLR Cuck's (sic) usual standard.
I thought the part about having to toilet train her daughter over the weekend (to get her into the only childcare she could fine) was well done.
What? Did she also talk about discussing nuclear defense policy with her little daughter Amy?
A little perspective on that childcare thing.
In my area, childcare is tremendously oversupplied and cheap, and I'm living in a boring blue collar town.
10 times as many woman earn degrees in education as can be absorbed into jobs in the public schools. Their only other potential employers are childcare, substituting or Catholic schools.
Every protestant church in this area offers daycare in its basement. These churches are damned near empty on Sundays. They get federal and state grants. It's the only way the churches can survive.
"I don't see how [Warren] could have done any better."
Well, maybe by handing out free beer before the speech started.
Seriously, launching a campaign that's already still-born. She's gonna need a lotta committed donors who are willing to knowingly piss away their money. As far as I'm concerned the race is between Poke-us-Haunt-us and Kirsten Gillibrand as to who drops out first.
If all EW's *scams* have been confessed, exposed she is now making a clean start with announcement and no downside.
A toad frozen in the snow or a half-baked one will whip Schlump's gilded A$$ in 2020 barring further Russian collusion. Warren IS part Native American, just not as big a part as she thought. Native Americans lived on both continents - in North, Central, and South "America" - and developed "great" cultures/countries for millennia until the devastation Europeans wrought, and before the "sh*thole" U.S. was born out of the War of Independence in 1776. I get an email from Elizabeth Warren frequently, and I back her for president in 2020. Her ancestry is a phony issue that won't stop her. If she had MORE Cherokee heritage that might have a big negative in this racist redneck country. Racist Schlump will call her "Pocahontas" regardless, as if that were a bad thing. The 2020 erection will be Schlump's last stand. It will be the Battle of Little Bighorn II: Schlump vs. Pocahontas.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Little_Bighorn
gspencer: "Seriously, launching a campaign that's already still-born"
Indeed.
One candidate of color can nuke her whenever he/she/xe wishes.
If you're not willing to concede that, then I think you can't distinguish form from substance.
So form > substance?
As with Billary, I can't imagine that Cherokee lady saying anything worth listening to, so I can't imagine her giving a good speech regardless of her tones and body language.
I thought the part about having to toilet train her daughter over the weekend (to get her into the only childcare she could fine) was well done.
Oh gosh! maybe I was wrong just above...wait a minute...hang on...nope, not worth listening to.
But regardless of whether the content is worth hearing, it's important for a president to be able to sound convincing when telling lies about how his children take a shit.
Found 22 assets totaling $4,674,026 to $14,761,001 in 2011 so she can easily get her kid into daycare w/o any special requirements.
Trumpit: "A toad frozen in the snow or a half-baked one will whip Schlump's gilded A$$ in 2020 barring further Russian collusion."
On the contrary, you and your dem pals are going to need to continue your russian collusion to generate your next hoax dossier in order to cover up your wholesale spying on citizens, the congress and opposition party candidates.
Just have the DNC repeat its previous DNC-->PerkinsCoie-->FusionGPS (FBI/DOJ FISA702 data abuses)-->Foreign Agent dude Steele-->Russian oligarchs & Putin Associates-->Hoax dossier-->FusionGPS (nellie!)-->DOJ (Bruce!)-->FBI while running a simultaneous setup operation out of the CIA working with MI6 contacts.
I recommend you get right on that.
Agree with Althouse completely—if Hillary! had been able to give that speech she would be President.
Pocahontas did a much better job than Kamala when she announced her candidacy. Every mother can relate to Warren’s story about toilet training an almost 2 year old toddler.
For the first time I found Warren more than likable enough. If she can weather the fake Indian lie, Warren will be a contender.
Drago; again every single one of your supposed quotes of me is either a complete fabrication for which you’ve never supplied a link, or else a misquote/mischaracterization that is so gross as to be as bad as a fabrication.
You’re such a disgusting filthy pig. I want everyone reading this to know that the rest of us have lost count of the number of times you have pulled this stunt, and we’re called out by me, and you never backed it up.
High dive into an empty pool.
Dems have always been about style over substance. An adroit tongue does not a leader make if there is no substance behind the style. And there usually isn't.
Chuck, you're getting your titty twisted.
Yeah she cared so much about the little guy when she was making her fortune flipping foreclosed houses.
I wouldn't do that to make a buck because even though I can't do anything to help such people, I can refrain from profiting from their pain and upheaval.
She's a piece of shit, Althouse.
"Dems have always been about style over substance" - bingo especially when we realized that Dems policies didn't work. Hence the age of cultural marxism .
The child care potty training saga could be her way of saying I didn't hire "nanny" for my nino papoose.
Will Texans go for Okie?
I'm sure she sounded good. Althouse didn't address the substance but I will. Its just the same old Democrat snake oil. Pretending to be for the "little Guy" and railing against the Rich and their power.
Except, Clinton and Obama were Presidents while this happened. And Chuck Schumer and Elizabeth Wareen didn't do a damn thing to help "Working Families" when they had the power.
And of course, Warren supports Globalization, Cheap labor, Open Borders, Free Trade, etc. - just like all the RICH BILLIONAIRES who she rails against. IOW, she's a fake populist who's only singing that tune till we get enough "people of Color" who will vote D no matter what.
Once again, how does the mighty mouse Lizzie Warren message about the Obama induced depression hurting out of work victims stuck in a gig economy while the 2020 voters are in the middle of a Trump employment boom and a Trump raised wages Boom and a Trump peace in our time Boom?
Boom, Boom ,Boom.. Just asking?
Remember in Back to the Future when Doc Brown said, "No wonder your President has to be an actor; he's gotta look good on television." That's a crucial requirement for Presidential candidates now. You really have to be able to give speeches that will convince the voters to like and trust you more than the other candidates. As the old saying goes, "Sincerity - if you can fake that, you've got it made."
You see, Althouse, this is where things break down for you.
Childcare was a real issue 50 years ago. It isn't now. But, it has great symbolic importance to you as a feminist identity politics grievance.
Fighting over a problem that was resolved a long time ago still appeals you, and the tacit demand for ever greater government subsidies and subsidized jobs for women continues to appeal to you despite the cost, and despite the lack of any real need.
The problem of daycare has been completed solved over the past 50 years with the generous guaranteed student loans. A vast army of young women wanted to be teachers and there aren't enough jobs for them. So, they have to take what they can get, which is daycare jobs.
We tend to compare speech making styles to the kinds of speeches we're used to listening to. I've always thought Obama has the cadence of a preacher. His speeches sound like sermons. Ronald Reagan was a storyteller. Dwight Eisenhower was giving instructions to his troops. Trump is giving a speech to his boardroom. Give them facts, let them in on an inside joke, and send them off with their next assignment. I listened to Elizabeth Warren on TV this morning, and I've heard her in person multiple times. Warren has a teacher vibe. She's obviously comfortable in a lecture environment, and her speaking style is part of her school marm persona. It's not surprising her style would appeal to Prof Althouse. It's in her comfort zone. Because most everyone has had to listen to a teacher lecture at some point in our lives. Whether we enjoyed the experience or not colors the impression we get from Warren.
If you want a Better USA, don't keep importing millions of Democrat Voters - instead kick New England out of the USA and tell them to join Canada. Do you realize how sane this country would be if we didn't 12 Asshole Liberal Senators from New England voting for Open borders and every Left-wing shit piece of legislation?
And I'd love to hear where she got the statistic that 1 out of every 3 mill workers in 1912 died before they were 25. That's sounds like another made up left wing "fact".
Dem 1: "Let's vote for Warren over Harris, I think she can beat Trump."
Dem 2: "You mean we should vote for the white woman who claimed to be native american and submitted plagiarized recipes to the "Pow Wow Chow" cookbook in an act of incredibly stupid cultural appropriation and mockery on the order of wearing black face, instead of the Black woman who slept her way to the political top the good old fashion way?"
Dem 1: "Well we haven't yet replaced systemic white male patriarchal oppression and racism with identity politics (though we're close) so we still need to run a white person in order to trick the middle of the road, and middle class, and only mildly racist, into voting for her. Then we'll get the utopia we want."
Dem 2: "Nobody is mildly-racist. But why don't we just vote for Joe Biden, then?"
Dem 1: "He's a White Male, the boogie man, he IS the Systemic Patriarchal Racist Regime that we've been fighting against. Dude, you need to get Woke!"
Dem 2: "Yeah but he's handsy and kinda old-man creepy, that's gotta give him some cred with our people."
Dem 1: "Not enough. Wait, maybe he can come out as gay!"
Dem 2: "But he's not gay. That's really pandering."
Dem 1: "Their side won't believe it, but our side won't care, and we might just trick enough log cabin republicans and still closeted over-compensating deplorables to swing the vote."
Dem 2: "So a white guy who pretends to be gay, instead of a white woman who pretends to be Native American?"
Dem 1: "Not pretending, Identifying!! You can't question His/Her/Its Identity you racist/sexist/homophobic/islamaphobic/transphobic deplorable"
Dem 2: "Wow. Well done. The classes are paying off! Hey, let's go get a ginko-soy-elephant poo latte at Starbucks!"
Dem 1: :"I can't, I'm on deadline to finish my listicle article on why "Trans-racial is not the new Trans-sexual". Besides there are too many dirty smelly homeless fuckers using the bathroom there."
I am NOT Laslo (I'm not even identifying as Laslo).
Potty training your kid in a weekend = humble brag.
Relatable? Relatable in that "What's wrong with the rest of you?" kind of way.
You know why the Mill owners treated the workers like shit in 1912? Its because most of them were immigrants who'd put up with it. And if they didn't they got replaced by some newer immigrants who would.
IOW, open borders retarded the growth of labor unions for about 20 years. But Liz Warren wants open borders.
**Fighting over a problem that was resolved a long time ago still appeals **
Do feminist Profs keep fighting that last war just like Generals.
Not nimble in intelligence, thinking.
Older women - white ones - will love Elizabeth Warren. No one else will.
Blacks/Hispanics/People of Color aren't going to vote for her. They'll vote for Harris or Brooks. The dumb Bernie Bros aren't going to vote for her either.
She might do well in New England or Pacific NW, which are full of people like her. Not so well, in the rest of the country.
Blogger MayBee said...
Potty training your kid in a weekend = humble brag.
Relatable? Relatable in that "What's wrong with the rest of you?" kind of way.
It sounds like the "quality time" that mostly absent yuppie boomer parents liked to boast about in the 80's.
What a great example of why this country is in the shitter.
This lady lied and took opportunities for DECADES that belonged to someone else while at the same time bemoaning the plight of that someone else.When she's found out, instead of resigning in disgrace and humbly returning to private life, she runs for president and is celebrated cuz she's on the right side politically and has the right 'parts'. Maybe there is something to that white privilege after all.
SMFH. Embarrassing.
I'm a bad guy cause I won't consider voting for her? She gave a great speech! Give me a break.
rcocean claims: Older women - white ones - will love Elizabeth Warren.
Not this older white woman!
Who was it who said, "If you can fake sincerity, you've got it made in Washington"?
I didn't see or hear the speech. But I do admire public speakers who put in the work (and it is work) to deliver a good speech. Obama was too lazy to prepare for a speech--and it showed. There's a drive and a flow to a speech when the speaker is prepared--it shows.
That doesn't necessarily mean that the speaker believes what he or she is saying or whether three is any substance to what is being said. But say that our host is using an ice skating score to rate speakers---she probably gave Trump's SOTU address an 8.5 and maybe Elizabeth Warren got an 8.
Do you live just make Hardin look good?
LLR Chuck: "Drago; again every single one of your supposed quotes of me...."
LOL
Our self-described Smear Merchant strikes again.
As before, you are continuously trying to walk back your previous comments in order to create some temporary "Today Conservative Street Cred".
tsk tsk
History does not start anew each day Chuck. I would have thought by now you lefti...er..."truest of the true conservatives!" would have learned that.
Potty training your kid in a weekend = humble brag.
Poor kid must have been fed fiber like a foie gras goose.
Racist commenter Chuck: "I want everyone reading this to know....."
Everyone reading this already knows all they need to know.
The jig is quite up.
LOL
Ralph: "Poor kid must have been fed fiber like a foie gras goose"
I'm thinking kale/soy shakes.
It was, for her, a very human speech. I got the sense she believed in what she was saying. She came across as earnest and caring. But that's just my opinion, and that only reflects feelings.
Can she continue this presentation when questioned in debates? She could easily slip back into her more lecturing mode that she has presented before. If that's the case, she may be in trouble.
But I do agree with Althouse that the speech was very well done. On the substance, it was less than compelling and just a repeat of what has been said by Democrats for years and years. A+ for the feelz, though.
**We tend to compare speech making styles to the kinds of speeches we're used to listening to.**
Is it reasonable to hope Emerita Professora imparted substance during teacher career?
"Warren seems to have a strong natural talent for speaking to a crowd, really coming alive in front of a crowd."
Why do you think this speech shows "natural" talent?
"Paleface speak with silver tongue--
... Sterling, but still forked, Kemosabe."
Durbin Cuckholster Chuck: "...and we’re called out by me,...."
You were called out by Meade, and cordially invited to absent yourself.
Also, get lost Chuck. You're a creep. Even worse, you're a bore
You seem insistent on the form over content thing. I wonder if that really exists with speeches. If it does you should be able to watch Mussolini speak, and understand why the crowds went wild. Can you? I bet you cannot.
With speech the emotional response matters too much and you really cannot divorce that cleanly from the content.
So I think Hardin is vindicated again. Warren pushed buttons for you. Rather than admit it you talk about “form”.
Warren has two modes of speech - sobbing and scolding.
"Not this older white woman!"
I was talking about the dumb ones.
I hate frequent interruptions in speeches. Al Gore's acceptance speech in 2000 was the best one (in form) I've ever heard because it had none IIRC.
What did Chuck say that pissed off people not Drago?
"Yes, actually, it's true" said Elizabeth Warren's daughter "My mom really did potty-train me in a weekend"
How?
"Are you making one of those lame Indian jokes right now?"
No, seriously, how did she do it?
"She told me she was running for President, and I almost shit my pants"
"Some people voted for Trump because he was the last Republican standing and they care about illegal immigration."
I suspect those people also voted for Trump in the primaries, and not just because he was the last man standing.
Althouse liked the style and form of Senator Warren's speech.
To me, though, Warren comes off as an aggressive, preachy, didactic college professor, burdening me with a term paper, when I want to drink beer and chase girls with my friends this weekend.
Different strokes, I reckon.
Blogger Ralph L said...
I hate frequent interruptions in speeches. Al Gore's acceptance speech in 2000 was the best one (in form) I've ever heard because it had none IIRC.
What did Chuck say that pissed off people not Drago?
My guess: “Donald Trump is a Birther, a Vaxxer and a Truther.”
"Yeah, it's ironic-- I was potty-trained at 2, but my mom's full of shit"
Nah, Chuck, it's your creepy tone to Althouse that gets a lady's hackles up.
Patronizing stalker is not a good look. People that sound like you often have human body parts in their freezers.
What did Chuck say that pissed off people not Drago?
Hey, just FYI for anyone who hasn't noticed it. When Drago disagrees w/ a commenter he makes up stuff they're saying. Called me an anti-semite when I wrote about my support for the March for Life. The other day a commenter wrote stuff about immigration that he disagreed w/ and he pretended to quote that commenter saying something about wanting to kill 60 million people under socialism.
He does't just exaggerate the argument. He chooses a completely different, outrageous subject that the commenter that only a evil person would support.
This triggers the commenter & you get like 10 or more annoyed comments. He's done this with Chuck for over a year now. Or the commenter leaves the blog, because what's the point getting into a adolescent 12 year old male-style argument? Waste of time.
It's his way of keeping the blog "pure" and chasing out any dissent. But, until he can chase the commenter away, you get a lot of stupid back & forth because someone is outraged their comments are being so mischaracterized. Meanwhile, many people do not read the whole comment thread, and they miss the trolling of Drago.
Warren's apology for claiming to be an American Indian in her Texas bar application made repeated references to her respect for tribal citizenship and tribal sovereignty, and made the point that the tribe's citizens having the right to be the only ones who could decide who qualified as a citizen and the right to exclude those who the tribe did not not deem to be citizens about eight different times.
Substitute "American" for "tribal" and Warren is right on board with Trump regarding borders.
What did Chuck say that pissed off people not Drago?
Chuck said...
"I am afraid you are mistaking me for someone who has an interest in fair treatment of Donald Trump. I'm not your guy. I am interested in smearing him, hurting him and prejudicing people against him."
( And anybody who voted fro Trump is ignorant, and stupid)
People: if you want this blog to be pure & filled with people who agree w/ you: Perhaps just say so.
Don't call names. Just write the rules on the top of the page. The blog used to be a mix of opinions. If the goal has changed, don't waste time calling people names. Tell everyone about the new mission and say you'll delete anyone who doesn't agree with you.
But this name calling stuff? This deliberate mischaracterization of arguments? It's DRAMA more suited to a 7th grade mean girl lunch room.
You seem insistent on the form over content thing. I wonder if that really exists with speeches. If it does you should be able to watch Mussolini speak, and understand why the crowds went wild. Can you? I bet you cannot.
Would be great to speak Italian and German to understand what those guys were saying that got the crowds so excited.
As to form,Trump a distant second to Obama,or Bill Clinton and others who could read the teleprompter as if it came from the heart.
Trump's SOTU speech was full of good news but not particularly great style. He is much better winging it.
I didn't hear the speech but how many times did she use the word 'fight'?
Democrats are always 'fighting'. Fighting for fifteen, fighting for healthcare, fighting
racism, fighting transphobia, but mostly fighting their fellow citizens.
Rhetoric was important from ancient times. It was the basic skill for the ancient politician, and these were professionally trained. Indeed, it was a fundamental part of education. An educated person was expected to be well-spoken and skilled in debate. This has been lost, mostly, and most who are good at it are "naturals".
Many successful politicians are "naturals", and its not odd that Warren is one of these.
As for sounding sincerely sincere, etc., this too is part of training, or part of the skill-set of the "natural".
Another skill, or natural talent, is that of resisting emotional responses evoked by people trying to sell you things.
"If she can weather the fake Indian lie, Warren will be a contender." And you'll still be a deplorable person who supports the biggest fake of them all.
Full Moon, I voted for Trump. In the general election.
Chuck said...
Full Moon, I voted for Trump. In the general election.
Yeah, we know. Me, I voted against Hillary.
wwww: "Called me an anti-semite when I wrote about my support for the March for Life."
LOL
Nice try.
The leadership of the Womens March is fully anti-semitic, which was the point.
Your bit of bait and switch typical of the left. Not that I blame you really. What else can you do at this point?
Elizabeth Warren knows the tricks and compromises that fill the days of our leaders. Warren for America!
Yeah, wwww, after a while you see a name and SOB (scroll on by).
Ten years ago, there was more serious discussion here, but now we pretend we're tweeting (except for Bruce).
LLR Chuck: "Full Moon, I voted for Trump. In the general election."
1) There is no proof of this
2) It is irrelevant
3) You have 3 continuous years of complete narrative and operational alignment with the left
All else shrinks to insignificance.
I suppose I should offer a 4): the lefties here are very very very quick to rise to your defense as you attack conservatives/republicans who are standing up the to dems.
Very very quick indeed.
All coincidence, to be sure.....(wink wink)..
tommyesq: "Warren's apology for claiming to be an American Indian in her Texas bar application made repeated references to her respect for tribal citizenship and tribal sovereignty, ...."
It was amusing to watch Warren robotically turn every question into that answer and to just keep at it. She is really quite horrific and tone deaf off the cuff and I suspect that she will be fully exposed by the other dems as required in what is sure to be a dynamic democrat nominating process.
"Fight" was Bob Schrum's mantra. It was Gephardt that beat "working families" to death.
Ralph L: ""Fight" was Bob Schrum's mantra. It was Gephardt that beat "working families" to death."
Wasn't it Gephardt that was the first democrat to refer to those who are economically well off and simply middle class as the "winners of life's lottery".
A very big step in the democrats war on the middle class as they transitioned fully from the post-WW2 defenders of the working class to simple bucket-boys and gals for the hollywood and tech elites.
Bob Shrum is still my favorite Democrat consultant of all time, what with his astonishing Anti-NewEngland Patriots-like record in Presidential contests.
The political anti-Midas touch.
Part of the problem with understanding rhetoric in another country, in another time, in another language, is that understanding the language itself is not enough. It is the entire cultural context.
Understanding foreign political speech is more difficult than translating poetry.
"If you're not willing to concede that, then I think you can't distinguish form from substance."
The first test for any presidential candidate is to talk about the middle class without calling them deplorable.
It seems this time we'll have a Democrat nominee who can pass that test.
The second test is to talk about helping the middle class without calling rich people deplorable.
That's going to be a much higher hurdle for the Dems this time.
I have always thought that Obama was passable to good at reading "uplifting" lines written by others, but had no poetry (meaning memorable crystallization of ideas that stick in the hearers mind and define the speaker).
However, he was flat out the best comic of any recent president because of his timing. This is not a small thing. He could deliver a funny line that W or Clinton might get a laugh with but would never own and make you think it just popped into his head.
Trump is funny as well, in a funny guy at the bar sort of way, but he does not have the polish and timing that Obama has.
Most politicians are just boring, whether right or wrong on policy.
buwaya: "Part of the problem with understanding rhetoric in another country, in another time, in another language, is that understanding the language itself is not enough. It is the entire cultural context."
Not so difficult in Europe, in particular with regard to the EU/Brussels leadership and Brexit, the EU treatment of the southern rim nations, the EU treatment of the Eastern European nations desired national policies, etc.
It's the European version of Red State/Blue state arguments here.
Verhofstadt is a particular piece of work.
Credit where credit is due.
Althouse's idea, to pay women a minimum wage for staying home to take care of their own kids is brilliant.
I concur 100%.
Instead of massive state and federal subsidies to women to work in jobs where they take care of other people's kids, pay them to take care of their own kids.
I think you'd quickly see 75% of women go for this deal, to be with thir own kids. This deal would be cheaper in terms of public funds that the welter of subsidies we currently employ.
Don't everybody bust the servers..
https://elizabethwarren.com/
Me too. And Trump has a lot of good sounding things on foreign policy, realistic not wanting to interfere in other countries, hope for the middle class, but his tax reform, his impulsive, egotistic tweeter mind without a thought our strategy will make him a one term president vulnerable to the likes of Warren.
Like Kamala Harris's speech, good energy, but the laundry list of bad things is pretty tedious.
But, unlike Harris, the entire production -- location, music, proposals, candidate, are all thematically connected. Warren used the 1912 Lawrence Textile Strike as a touchstone for her own progressive proposals and maintained the theme throughout. It was extremely professionally done.
SMH @ people thinking Dim Lizzy would be an adequate president, instead of the weak-minded liar, sap, and deceitful ditz that she has been her entire life. C'mon Americans, come fucking on!
As I said in another thread, EW is a powerhouse, look out. Trump is pooing his pants.
Drago, I’m a happy Republican.
I like Mitch McConnell; Chief Justice Roberts, Justices Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch and Kavanaugh. I like Senators Romney, Cornyn, Graham, Cruz, Portman and Rubio. I like Mitch Daniels (now President of Purdue University) and former Governor Kasich of Ohio. I like several of the Republicans in my state’s Congressional delegation; Justin Amash; Fred Upton; Tim Wahlberg.
I even like many folks in the Trump Administration. Betsy DeVos; Scott Gottlieb; Mick Mulvaney; Dan Coats; Jeff Sessions; Bill Barr.
I just don’t like the Trump Party. Trump himself; who’s been a sometimes Republican in his life. Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity; both of whom use their media positions to bash Republican leadership on a regular basis. And the other flacks who have been willing to lie for Trump and tolerate his lies.
I even like Ann Coulter. Shows you how aligned I am with the left.
Warren's speech would have to repudiate the whole of her political experience to interest me. She's promoted too many ideas that harm the people she wants to vote for her, for me to be interested in anything she says. Did she sign on to the Green New Deal? Does she promote taxing people on their 'fair share'? DO businesses need to hire based on racial/gender factors? Then she has nothing to say I want to hear/
BTW, I claim no party affiliation. There's no way I'd be a Democrat, and the Republicans are no more conservative in approach than FDR. I claim only to be conservative, and vote accordingly.
“Hey, just FYI for anyone who hasn't noticed it. When Drago disagrees w/ a commenter he makes up stuff they're saying.”
Exactly. That’s far creepier and more jerky than poor Chuck.
it's as with factions across the pond. may Osborne, Hammond are supposedly in the same party as johnson, rees moggs and grieve, but not actually, one represents the City's interests and the other the Midlands, Leave vs, Brexit. as it was with Heseltine and major vs thatcher, they promise the latter's reform, but they keep the structure of the former,
McConnell and Graham, are applauded for doing the bare minimum, sometimes not even that, and carrying the Qatari Turkish card against the Saudi-emirate alliance,
"I am not running for President in 2020."
I'm thoroughly impressed, too. But in a different way.
What Henry @ 3:10 said.
Whoever wrote that speech is worth what Warren is paying him/her.
Harvard quality.
Yep. She lies like a rug.
I didn't hear the speech. I think she sounds like a whiner!!...a complainer. She reminds me of a grade school teacher that can't understand why gravity is just theory.
Didn't we have some fellow in 2004 that rode his soaring rhetoric speech into the White House in 2008?? A one-hit wonder!!
Rubio belongs in the former group, even though I applaud his part with Venezuela, among cabinet officials, tom price was a disappointment, Ronnie Jackson has been vindicated and reinstated, zinke only the latter,
Without any evidence or example:
Blogger Inga...Allie Oop said...
“Hey, just FYI for anyone who hasn't noticed it. When Drago disagrees w/ a commenter he makes up stuff they're saying.”
Exactly.
Inga: "Exactly. That’s far creepier and more jerky than poor Chuck."
LOL
Uh huh.
Chuck: "Drago, I’m a happy Republican."
LOL
Awesome thread.
The only way Warren’s Presidential launch could have been improved would have been to have Native American activist Nathan Phillips on the dais beating his drum in rhythm to the cadence of Pocahontas’ voice.
LLR Chuck: "I even like Ann Coulter. Shows you how aligned I am with the left."
Demonstrably false. As everyone knows.
Commonality:
langford peel said...
Drunk, nasty and mean.
Must be like looking in a mirror for you Althouse.
It’s no wonder that you are so defensive
Inga said...
LOL. What a dumb bitch you are Althouse. I’ve been restraining myself from saying that for a long time. How’s that for lack of restraint?
Too soon for a link to speech, I guess
From website:
After decades of largely flat wages and exploding household costs, millions of families can barely breathe. For generations, people of color have been shut out of their chance to build wealth. It’s time for big, structural changes to put economic power back in the hands of the American people.
That means putting power back in the hands of workers and unions. It also means transforming large American companies by letting their workers elect at least 40% of the company’s board members to give them a powerful voice in decisions about wages and outsourcing. And it means a new era of strong antitrust enforcement so giant corporations can’t stifle competition, depress wages, and drive up the cost of everything from beef to Internet access.
As the wealthiest nation in the history of the world, we can make investments that create economic opportunity, address rural neglect, and a legacy of racial discrimination–if we stop handing out giant tax giveaways to rich people and giant corporations and start asking the people who have gained the most from our country to pay their fair share.
That includes an Ultra-Millionaire Tax on America’s 75,000 richest families to produce trillions that can be used to build an economy that works for everyone, including universal childcare, student loan debt relief, and down payments on a Green New Deal and Medicare for All. And we can make a historic investment in housing that would bring down rents by 10% across America and create 1.5 million new jobs.
Martha said...
The only way Warren’s Presidential launch could have been improved would have been to have Native American activist Nathan Phillips on the dais beating his drum in rhythm to the cadence of Pocahontas’ voice.
Good idea. Someone needs to manipulate Phillips into wholeheartedly endorsing Warren.Maybe nominate her for membership in his tribe.
Warren's website:
Issues
No mention of 'Green New Deal' or any stance on climate change! She's basically trying to be the female Donald Trump? She's clueless if she thinks she can avoid swallowing AOC's poison pill.
LLR Chuck is sort of the "Nathan Phillips of AlthouseBlog".
Phillips presents himself as one thing but is so obviously another thing that it surprises no one that the entirety of the factual record utterly proves the latter.
By the way, did Lizzie have time to mention the elopement of her parents?
Ann Althouse said...
I thought the part about having to toilet train her daughter over the weekend (to get her into the only childcare she could fin[d]) was well done. A very relatable situation.
But how did Warren say she did it?
"All I can say is I stand before you today courtesy of three bags of M&Ms and a cooperative toddler."
A revealing story, actually, to sum up her candidacy.
Listen to each element of her speech: isn't it clear Warren believes she can apply that same Pavlovian strategy to voters?
If you vote for me, I have this bag of M&Ms. If you "toddlers" cooperate, and you are a member of the right group, I will give you one of those M&Ms (and make someone else pay for it).
Clearly, Warren believes she can train voters and win by putting the "candy" in her candidacy.
Warren’s speech today.
@EDH -- And you too can be potty trained. ;)
* * *
walter said...
Too soon for a link to speech, I guess
I googled and found it. You would think they'd push it to the web site.
Queued up at the 1:27 mark.
On style, I thought Warren was shrill, pandering, divisive and hackneyed.
I don't think people buy her Horatio Alger bit.
Way too parochial. She sounded like she's still running for senate seat from Mass. Are national figures are already distancing themselves?
Even in Mass the applause was perfunctory. Repeatedly in the background you could hear one shrill supporter in vain trying to start chants. You could see everyone wanted out of the cold, and it wasn't that cold (but it was windy).
I would't be surprised if the camera angle hid the small size of the crowd. She and Bernie Sanders barely half filled a Boston Theater's 2,700 seats even with free tickets right after Trump was elected (and Warren reelected promising to serve her full term).
Since then we've had her latest twin insults of walking away from her senate seat and the native ancestry debacle in full bloom.
Warren may be a good candidate in a Democrat one party state like Mass. But I'm glad she's in the national race because I think it helps Trump.
Alex,
She tucks the Green New Deal (that wording) bit into the Rebuild the Middle Class section
Warren mentioned Green New Deal in passing. She's more old school than those to her left. The green new deal gets a seat in the back of the bus. To AOC & Co. the Green New Deal is the bus.
LarsPorsena said...
I didn't hear the speech but how many times did she use the word 'fight'?
Democrats are always 'fighting'. Fighting for fifteen, fighting for healthcare, fighting
racism, fighting transphobia, but mostly fighting their fellow citizens."
Indeed. Democrats are always fighting reality.
Lizzie Warren took an axe, and gave her mother forty whacks; when she saw what she had done, she gave her father forty-one.
At least that was what I read in the beginnings of her speech, when she moaned about mistreatment of workers in her perceived history of Lawrence, MA and the wonders of introducing socialism to local society through union violence and law breaking. Whatever was then is not now.
And 40% of Americans can’t find $400 to cover an emergency.
What the Federal Reserve said was that 40% of Americans said that they can't find $400 to cover emergencies. That is a completely different premise.
The cost of college has more than tripled.
Tuition has increased by roughly 200%, but college is not the only service to have gotten wildly more expensive in recent decades. Since 1950, the real prices of the services of doctors, dentists, and lawyers have risen at similar rates as the price of higher education. The villain, as much as there is one, is economic growth.
And Elizabeth Warren probably has no answer for fixing the effects of economic growth other than discouraging college attendance. Or perhaps she can get onboard with AOC's Green New Deal and proceed to take us to third-world status in 10 years.
I quit reading after those points registered. Your idea of a good speech should change to give demerits for twisted logic.
A good speech for sure, as in very well delivered. From my perch in MA it just may be the best I’ve ever seen from her. As for the cheering crowd, if they are middle class they must have traveled in because the middle class in Lawrence MA would be downright poor anywhere else.
I didn't listen to her speech. What for? A simple rule of thumb (albeit there are some occasional exceptions) is that you can't go wrong assuming every Democrat politician is a grifter running a con and every Democrat voter has larceny in their heart.
It seems like only yesterday that the lefties and their LLR hench-poodles were assuring us that "Li'l Tomahawk" had never ever attempted to use her faux "heritage" inany official manner whatsoever....and we see how that turned out.
The only option left to Warren to try and turn this around would be to blame Trump for what she did years and years ago.
VA dems are trying out that strategy as we speak. Literally blaming Trump for democrat blackface incidents and sexual assault allegations from decades ago.
Its a bold strategy and we will have to wait and see if it pays off beyond your typical lefty/LLR.
what I was saying about ostensible center right figures,
https://legalinsurrection.com/2019/02/merkels-government-deliberately-helped-terrorist-escape-justice-u-s-attorney-general-says/#comments
At 1hr, 37m Warren says that Trump was the product of a rigged system. I totally missed that at the time. All along I thought that Jeb was the result of a rigged system and that Trump destroyed him, politically along with his donor class. All along I thought that Hillary was the product of a rigged system and that she destroyed Bernie Sanders and preserved the Dem donor class.
Okay, Warren is like Trump. We have the original, why would we want a copy?
Didn’t Warren claim her mom and dad eloped because the grandparents were racists and wouldn’t accept the “Cherokee” squaw?
Now that it’s clear EW is not an Indian, and therefore her mother was not either, has she accepted that they eloped because he knocked her up out wedlock? Maybe she can pivot to: my grandparents we’re so trump like in their bigotry, and if abortion had been legal as it should be, they could have avoided all the prejudice.
Of course then EW wouldn’t be here. Maybe she should prove her bona fides by suing her parents for “wrongful life”...
I can’t recall the last speech I heard that I thought was truly good. None of Obama’s were. Trump has had some great lines but the speeches do nothing for me. George W.? Wha? Clinton was always way too long and, tbh, unlistenable. George H. W. did have one great line: “Read my lips, no new taxes.” Reagan had some fair lines but “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall” was his best. Carter? Malaise. Nixon: Checkers. Eisenhower: Military Industrial Complex. Truman? Stop criticizing my daughter. FDR: Nothing to fear but fear itself. Good lines here and there but that’s about it.
Ted Talks. Sanctimony on steroids. Sermons I’ve heard over the years? I can only remember being impressed with one by Vance Havner that I found online. I didn’t finish it.
I’ve given five high school commencement addresses. They were okay.
Speeches are really not all they’re cracked up to be.
A couple days ago someone in my home was watching the Jimmy Kimmel show on television, and I happened to see a minute of it.
Kimmel was making fun of Elizabeth Warren about the Indian thing. Kimmel was saying something along the lines that she ought to go live in a tepee.
When I saw that, I figured that Warren cannot win the Democrat nomination.
"The villain, as much as there is one, is economic growth."
Wow...nice try
This is going to be an interesting campaign season. No one, yet, on the Dem side seems powerful enough to push everyone else to the side, as Crooked Hillary was able to do in 2016. You can see the behind the scenes jockeying with the release of Warren’s TX bar stuff. We always expected some actual intent to defraud with her, and now we have the proof - she lied to the state of TX. But I don’t see that taking her out, at least this early. What I think we are seeing right now is more of a beauty pageant. The Dem nominees just have to look and sound decent, and she appears to be making that cut with this speech. If they can’t do a decent job of formally opening their campaigns, they would be mincemeat against Trump. And some of them don’t even seem to be able to get over this hurdle. If I were one of those people overtly running for the Dem nomination, I would have had that opening speech professionally written, then practice the heck out of giving the speech. As I said, she made that cut.
I’m unable or maybe unwilling to separate form from substance. That’s what gave us Obama.
the dems spent 1.5 billion in the last campaign, not including the inkind contribution from the rizzotto press, journolist echo chambers,
@AZ Bob said...
Did she pause to sip a beer?
No, she drank bottle after bottle of water after watching the Big Dick Toilet Salesman during his testimony before the Dem's committee hearing yesterday - a true test for her bladder.
as opposed to when purdue pharmaceuticals flack, Erick holder before the supreme court, was in contempt of congress for fast and furious
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/02/09/theresa-may-urge-mps-give-time-seek-brexit-concessions/
"And Elizabeth Warren just delivered the hell out of one. If you're not willing to concede that, then I think you can't distinguish form from substance."
A "great speech" should have both. No?
Blogger cubanbob said...
"Democrats are always 'fighting'."
For Democrats, fighting is what you do when you aren't accomplishing anything. You "fight" for campaign finance reform, but no legislation results.
You can substitute words like "posturing" and "posing" for "fighting".
Mary Beth said...Okay, Warren is like Trump. We have the original, why would we want a copy?
Because woman?
Didn’t Warren claim her mom and dad eloped because the grandparents were racists and wouldn’t accept the “Cherokee” squaw?
It's one of those lies that keeps on giving, rather like Hillary Clinton claiming she was named for Sir Edmond Hillary or that she was under sniper fire in Bosnia.
@JAORE:
I think the correct description would be "Warren gave a great delivery".
I agree that a great speech includes both form and substance. A worthless speech can include a great delivery, while an important speech can be poorly delivered.
Ann says: "I'm one of the few people who don't like much of Trump's substance but enjoy a great deal of his style."
What about Trump's substance is there not to like? The upward wage pressure for the working class (that could only come about through deregulation and immigration enforcement), Kim coming to the table (would he talk to Hillary after she murdered Ghadaffy duck?), restructuring trade relationships as bilateral (freedom to revise) rather than multilateral (surrender of sovereignty since there's too much to lose in withdrawing), judges who believe in the constitution, embassy in Jerusalem, an end to endless wars, real pushback against Russia and China?
Sheesh. This guy is a blessing to our fair land.
I think this is overdue:
You know who else was great at giving speeches? He had lots of passion and energy and really believed what he was saying. He had a strong natural talent for speaking and really came alive in front of a crowd.
As with Warren, substance was a bit of a problem.
Her speech is the same pack of silly lies and empty promises They all spew:
"Where every child can dream big and reach for opportunity."
Hey, that's a good, er, progressive, idea! How come nobody else ever thought of that?
Chuck,
Thank you for your service!
--The Democratic Party
I laughed, cause she’s a dingbat.
Ann, You've explained perfectly why I never, ever watch political speeches. Their point is to manipulate peoples' emotions, and I don't like being manipulated. Reading what they have to say in cold print is always more instructive (plus less time consuming).
A "great speech" should have both. No?
No, not for the speeches of socialist-light feministas like the Cherokee lady and her big-dreaming potty-trained children.
They're actresses, so judge them on their acting ability and their self-reports of potty-training, don't judge the lines someone else wrote for them, because those lines are pretty pitiful and don't reflect well on anyone and you'll feel short-changed after reading them: "this creature is running for President?!?"
Didn’t Warren claim her mom and dad eloped because the grandparents were racists and wouldn’t accept the “Cherokee” squaw?
Yes, she lied about that also. But the important issue is whether her grandparents had big dreams about indigenous potty-training opportunities.
If anyone is interested in Warren's actual substance here's a long article she wrote for Foreign Affairs last month. If you take the time to read it carefully you'll see that she outlines a great many things that are bad about America and the world, but when you look for her solutions to those bad things she offers nothing but fluff. We just have to do a better and smarter job of doing those things we do and she's just the gal to do it.
And you might notice that many of the things she wants to do sound most Trumpian - but he's doing it all wrong!
From what I saw of her speech, she did the same thing today.
Sorry. Elizabeth. We want Kamala.
I saw part of her speech on PBS. Assuming that what I saw was one of the better parts of the speech, I infer that Althouse sets a pretty low bar for good speech-giving when the speech-giver is another female law professor.
If one stops to think for a moment, one realizes that the shadowy “rich” who she alleges are keeping down the middle class includes Warren herself! She made her money circa 2008 in the foreclosure market, buying up distressed properties and thereby stiffing the very same middle class households that today she cries her crocodile tears over.
Professional, professorial courtesy.
Elizabeth Warren is a fabricator professionally and personally.
Of course, if you can fake sincerity...
Liz lives in my hood but I am not voting for her. She’s not hot enough.
Although, she is thin which is a plus.
I liked the part about how the greedy irresponsible textile workers and their almost potty-trained children drove the industry to the shithole countries, "a story about how real change happens in America."
Hitler was an exceptionally charismatic and persuasive speaker. Look how that turned out. I have no respect for people who are good at pushing harmful, evil ideas.
Darrell: Chuck, Thank you for your service!
--The Democratic Party"
I understand there is talk of Chuck being nominated for a "Blumenthal (Da Nang Dick AND Sidney!) Medal with 3 Oak Durbin Clusters" as well as a 2018 Campaign Ribbon.
I can scarcely think of a more deserving fellow for just such an honor.
Btw, did you know that LLR Chuck once courageously pondered joining the military, though mere moments later decided against it?
It's true! And I'm sure you will shortly be able to read all about Chuck's "journey" in the as yet to be finalized series of Short Stories By A LLR Republican: My Agonizing Decision To Almost Join The Military Before Deciding Against It And Heading To Sonic For Their 3 For A Dollar Corndogs
Now in paperback and audiobook versions!
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा